The idea is NOT sound that we should look at the more minor set of dangers while relatively ignoring the most dangerous. The so-called gun control listed today is not reasonable or sound, even to many anti-gunners.It is reality that as far as human on human caused preventable deaths, medical malpractice is orders of magnitude worse, but we must have health care. Knives kill many more than so-called assault rifles, yet we need them to eat, just as we need guns for protection, hunting, and recreation. Vehicles driven by people kill more, but we need them for transportation a lot. Hammers kill more than so-called assault rifles, too, yet we need them to build.There is no Constitutional Right to keep and bear hammers, but there is for arms, including guns. Except automatics and cannons, and explosive missiles.There is no Constitutional Right to smoke cigarettes which kill hundreds of thousands per year including second hand smoke. There is the Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which really does not include killing others if it makes you happy, but does include the right of self defense to live which others can not take away from you just because they don't like guns of some sort.There are already thousands of laws about guns on the books, so even more aren't reasonably going to make a difference. The root causes of the increased violence are not addressed and we keep letting in over a million per year to increase our overpopulation. Crowd tolerance takes time, but is an extremely negative trait ecologically. In the end the crowded starving masses will turn to cannibalism to live, using sharp sticks if they have to. Insanity will become even more common merely because there are more people and not enough money to cover treating them all.These economic effects are among the first wave with overpopulation. A country 16.4 trillion in debt can not afford to treat all of the mentally unstable, or those affected by overcrowding hostility and insanity. Back when I was a kid and the US had half as many people, you did not hear of so many mass murders, but there were a few nuts who did and others who were cannibal. Even then the USA was well over long term sustainable population at the standard of living desired by most.So-called assault weapons banning will not change the root causes that are increasing with even more gross overpopulation. All weapons are assault weapons, or protection weapons, including our fists. Knee jerk reaction to surface problems will not get at the real roots. We are already too outgunned by the police and military, and the only thing keeping us from even a more tyrannical government is so many of us armed. Police can not act as fast as a citizen armed who is under attack from criminals, and the government is not enforcing the laws it has made let alone more laws. Many in government are guilty of felonies but not taken out of office and charged like they should be. Our country has been invaded by 30 million in the past 30 years and the military have not stopped it, nor treasonous politicians. Pollution and depletion have gone up, crimes against humanity no less terrible than a nut kid killing numerous innocent little kids.Does banning weapons matter when overpopulation will cause mass deaths in the billions followed many years later by extinction caused by the pollution those numbers of people put in the biosphere over time?Knee jerk reactions and idiotic logic don't help the children of the future. So-called reasonable gun control does nothing.

"Hammers kill more than so-called assault rifles, too, yet we need them to build."

When was the last time any of us heard about a mass killing due to hammers?

Here's an article that intentionally takes one specific weapon, rifles, and dishonestly compares it to dozens of weapons; the FBI stats for blunt objects do not differentiate between hammers, clubs, tire irons, nunchuks, bricks, crowbars, baseball bats, beer bottles, billy clubs, poles, cinderblocks, irons, and dozens of other weapons that are used to bludgeon people. It also conveniently leaves out every other type of gun murder.

'fess up Johnny .... ride in on your one trick which is population control. Isn't it? If the US had stricter gun control, fewer people would die .... and this wouldn't be very good for the "environment" and "ecosphere' and all those darn immigrants who are totally destroying the planet. Got your number bud and feeling as bad for your pony as I feel for the imaginary lines.

The idea is NOT sound that we should look at the more minor set of dangers while relatively ignoring the most dangerous.The so-called gun control listed today is not reasonable or sound, even to many anti-gunners.It is reality that as far as human on human caused preventable deaths, medical malpractice is orders of magnitude worse, but we must have health care. Knives kill many more than so-called assault rifles, yet we need them to eat, just as we need guns for protection, hunting, and recreation. Vehicles driven by people kill more, but we need them for transportation a lot. Hammers kill more than so-called assault rifles, too, yet we need them to build.There is no Constitutional Right to keep and bear hammers, but there is for arms, including guns. Except automatics and cannons, and explosive missiles.There is no Constitutional Right to smoke cigarettes which kill hundreds of thousands per year including second hand smoke. There is the Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which really does not include killing others if it makes you happy, but does include the right of self defense to live which others can not take away from you just because they don't like guns of some sort.There are already thousands of laws about guns on the books, so even more aren't reasonably going to make a difference. The root causes of the increased violence are not addressed and we keep letting in over a million per year to increase our overpopulation. Crowd tolerance takes time, but is an extremely negative trait ecologically. In the end the crowded starving masses will turn to cannibalism to live, using sharp sticks if they have to. Insanity will become even more common merely because there are more people and not enough money to cover treating them all.These economic effects are among the first wave with overpopulation. A country 16.4 trillion in debt can not afford to treat all of the mentally unstable, or those affected by overcrowding hostility and insanity. Back when I was a kid and the US had half as many people, you did not hear of so many mass murders, but there were a few nuts who did and others who were cannibal. Even then the USA was well over long term sustainable population at the standard of living desired by most.So-called assault weapons banning will not change the root causes that are increasing with even more gross overpopulation. All weapons are assault weapons, or >>protection<< weapons, including our fists. Knee jerk reaction to surface problems will not get at the real roots. We are already too outgunned by the police and military, and the only thing keeping us from even a more tyrannical government is so many of us armed. Police can not act as fast as a citizen armed who is under attack from criminals, and the government is not enforcing the laws it has made let alone more laws. Many in government are guilty of felonies but not taken out of office and charged like they should be. Our country has been invaded by 30 million in the past 30 years and the military have not stopped it, nor treasonous politicians. Pollution and depletion have gone up, crimes against humanity no less terrible than a nut kid killing numerous innocent little kids.Does banning weapons matter when overpopulation will cause mass deaths in the billions followed many years later by extinction caused by the pollution those numbers of people put in the biosphere over time?Knee jerk reactions and idiotic logic don't help the children of the future. So-called reasonable gun control does nothing.

"Hammers kill more than so-called assault rifles, too, yet we need them to build."

When was the last time any of us heard about a mass killing due to hammers?>> ]google "hammer murders"[[/]

Here's an article that intentionally takes one specific weapon, rifles, and dishonestly compares it to dozens of weapons; the FBI stats for blunt objects do not differentiate between hammers, clubs, tire irons, nunchuks, bricks, crowbars, baseball bats, beer bottles, billy clubs, poles, cinderblocks, irons, and dozens of other weapons that are used to bludgeon people. It also conveniently leaves out every other type of gun murder.

'fess up Johnny .... ride in on your one trick which is population control. Isn't it?[b]>>>{{no, you conveniently forgot all the emboldened remarks above]< If the US had stricter gun control, fewer people would die>>}}didn't happen before{{<<< .... and this wouldn't be very good for the "environment" and "ecosphere' and all those darn immigrants who are totally destroying the planet.>>}}the main source of US overpopulation and US people except me produce 20 times the pollution, and depletion of third worlders{{<< Got your number bud and feeling as bad for your pony as I feel for the imaginary lines.

Population graphs and pollution/depletion graphs are not imaginary lines. Other lines, like with human behavior have to be drawn. People that use any thing to kill others are criminals. People who destroy the biosphere are also criminals to me, whether by over-breeding or by pollution and depletion, greed, over-compassion or over-tolerance. Remember, I've been in real war, flying unarmed medical evacuation helicopters. Real combat injury and medal for valor. I have compassion and tolerance, just not TOO darn much of it. I worked hard and in pain to get what I've got and wish to protect it and my family. Now, I have to put a lousy 1" x 2 3/4" plug in my home defense shotgun to make it only 8 shot, instead of the extra $50 I paid to get that 9th shot. It stinks. Lucky I also have my Taurus Judge Public Defender, too!!! I carry it often, concealed, legally. It is devastating and I don't miss with either hand. Break in and try to steal one of my guitars, go ahead, make my day. I used those jamming too fast shooting toy M-16s in war occasionally, and wouldn't buy one anyway. I used to use medical tape to tape two 18 round magazines together, and still wouldn't waste the money on one or the ammo. For deer hunting, if ever drawn and able, I would use my 54 cal. black powder rifle or my compound bow. For long distance, if I so desired, I would get one like Wayne has and I and my dad had (me only for 3 shots at 14, too much kick!), a 300 Weatherby Magnum bolt action. Of course, that is not a deer rifle, more of a moose gun. Maybe .270 mag instead. I love animals, to eat!!! And for pets, too. We have an Eskimo/Shepard mix and all the animals that live around here are my friends. My friends the birds, squirrels, deer, mice, garter snakes, foxes, racoons and even bears, but not as much( at least not Big Blackie the Grouch)!

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

The idea is NOT sound that we should look at the more minor set of dangers while relatively ignoring the most dangerous.

That makes absolutely no sense because you will end up regulating only what is "most dangerous."

Quote:

The so-called gun control listed today is not reasonable or sound, even to many anti-gunners.

Various polls reveal that even gun owners favor some form of gun control. The reasons are painfully obvious: guns should be kept secure at home, people should learn how to use them properly, etc.

Quote:

It is reality that as far as human on human caused preventable deaths, medical malpractice is orders of magnitude worse, but we must have health care. Knives kill many more than so-called assault rifles, yet we need them to eat, just as we need guns for protection, hunting, and recreation. Vehicles driven by people kill more, but we need them for transportation a lot. Hammers kill more than so-called assault rifles, too, yet we need them to build.

You make it appear that with gun control guns can no longer be used "for protection, hunting, and recreation." But gun control is NOT the same as a gun ban.

The same goes for vehicles. When safety measures are required and people are required to learn how to drive them first before doing so, then that doesn't mean that they may no longer be used for transportation.

Quote:

There is no Constitutional Right to keep and bear hammers, but there is for arms, including guns. Except automatics and cannons, and explosive missiles.

From what I know, the right to bear arms is not a constitutional right but a natural right, part of the right to self-defense. That means you have the right to bear arms even if it is not written in the Constitution. BTW, if you are referring to the Second, that doesn't give you the right to bear arms. Rather, it uses the right to bear arms (which doesn't require approval from government) to justify the need to form militias. Finally, the right to bear arms may be abridged by law, which is why, for example, convicts are not allowed that right.

Quote:

There is no Constitutional Right to smoke cigarettes which kill hundreds of thousands per year including second hand smoke. There is the Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which really does not include killing others if it makes you happy, but does include the right of self defense to live which others can not take away from you just because they don't like guns of some sort.There are already thousands of laws about guns on the books, so even more aren't reasonably going to make a difference. The root causes of the increased violence are not addressed and we keep letting in over a million per year to increase our overpopulation. Crowd tolerance takes time, but is an extremely negative trait ecologically. In the end the crowded starving masses will turn to cannibalism to live, using sharp sticks if they have to. Insanity will become even more common merely because there are more people and not enough money to cover treating them all.

There is no right to smoke cigarettes but the "the pursuit of happiness" allows you to smoke cigarettes. However, rights may be abridged. That's why in various countries minors are not allowed to smoke, and smoking is not allowed in certain areas.

The point that there are "thousands of laws about guns on the books" such that "even more aren't reasonably going to make a difference" ironically works against your views. Did you realize that?

That is, arms proliferation might not lead to decreased violence but will amplify it. It's even likely that rather than use arms to defend themselves against government, citizens will use the same on each other.

Quote:

These economic effects are among the first wave with overpopulation. A country 16.4 trillion in debt can not afford to treat all of the mentally unstable, or those affected by overcrowding hostility and insanity. Back when I was a kid and the US had half as many people, you did not hear of so many mass murders, but there were a few nuts who did and others who were cannibal. Even then the USA was well over long term sustainable population at the standard of living desired by most.So-called assault weapons banning will not change the root causes that are increasing with even more gross overpopulation. All weapons are assault weapons, or protection weapons, including our fists. Knee jerk reaction to surface problems will not get at the real roots. We are already too outgunned by the police and military, and the only thing keeping us from even a more tyrannical government is so many of us armed. Police can not act as fast as a citizen armed who is under attack from criminals, and the government is not enforcing the laws it has made let alone more laws. Many in government are guilty of felonies but not taken out of office and charged like they should be. Our country has been invaded by 30 million in the past 30 years and the military have not stopped it, nor treasonous politicians. Pollution and depletion have gone up, crimes against humanity no less terrible than a nut kid killing numerous innocent little kids.Does banning weapons matter when overpopulation will cause mass deaths in the billions followed many years later by extinction caused by the pollution those numbers of people put in the biosphere over time?Knee jerk reactions and idiotic logic don't help the children of the future. So-called reasonable gun control does nothing.

As you put it, "[w]e are already too outgunned by the police and military," which makes me wonder where you got the idea that "the only thing keeping us from even a more tyrannical government is so many of us armed." You also forgot to mention that the reason why gun control in the U.S. is much less than that of many other countries is because the arms industry lobbies the government to avoid gun control and in return provides better armaments to the same government. The same arms industry also lobbies government to deregulate arms exports.

Thus, Big Business profits heavily by arming the populace, the government (which passes on the cost to the populace), and other countries (with trade used by the government as part of military aid and deals in exchange for military and economic advantages needed to keep the petro-dollar propped up, which in turn is offered as easy credit to the same populace that uses such to buy small arms and prop up a middle class lifestyle). Instead of gun control measures, the government arms police and military heavily and sets up formidable police and surveillance systems to keep the population in check. Meanwhile, citizens who are heavily in debt and are heavily dependent on Big Business for credit and government for services and tax cuts arm themselves, imagining that they can defend themselves against a tyrannical government that they themselves propped up and that works for a Big Business that provides them with credit and arms.

Finally, the claim that we should not see gun safety, etc., as a problem because we should look at overpopulation first is, again, fallacious for reasons given earlier.

This great majority of gun control measures are symbolic political theatrics. What Americans must wake up and see its not a matter of gun control it’s a matter of EDP control. EDP is law enforcement short hand for emotional disturbed person. Not nessecaraly the person suffering from clinical depression and post traumatic stress disorder, but the person who is acting out so violently that law enforcement must become involved. 40 years ago the Adam Lanza’s would have been in a mental institution getting treatment. His mother tried repeatedly to make this happen.

Seung-Hui Cho was diagnosed with a sever anxiety disorder know as selective mutism, and a major depressive disorder.

James Eagan Holmes attempted suicide in jail multiple time. Holmes defense filed a motion claiming he was a psychiatric patient. Holmes himself claimed to he had the disorder dysphoric mania and warned others he was bad news.

Eric Harris took Fluvoxamine an SSRI antidepressant know for the side effect of interfering with normal social function. Harris was diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder.

Adam Lanza was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome. This is a developmental disorder not a mental illness. Nancy Lanza suspected more and filed with a court to commit Adam. She felt she could no longer control him. One could say she lost her life because of the current system.

Before 1970 and ACLU involvement we institutionalized our mental patients. Now they are left on the street. If parents suspect a mental problem it takes months for the courts to sort it all out. Plenty of time for the mentally ill to plan, prepare, and execute a mass shooting. Most of the mentally ill are not stupid. It is interesting to note the Cho and Holmes obtained their guns legally. Klebold, Harris, and Lanza did not.

Anyone who is in law enforcement and corrections can tell you how many people they have to deal with who would be classified as EDP and how many came to very bad ends do to the poor choices and actions that stemmed from their mental illness. To see someone commit what can only be considered an atrocity such as the slaughter of 20 children at Sandy Hook. The murder of six adults including the courageous principle who tried with her bare hands to disarm a maniac with a rifle. In response to this the answer is to take guns away from the law abiding is ludicrous.

If a school boy takes a crayon and rights all over the wall the proper response is to say all students can’t have crayons?

But doing background checks to monitor EDPs may be part of gun control.

Your last statement is completely wrong because it assumes that gun control is the same as a gun ban.

The idea is NOT sound that we should look at the more minor set of dangers while relatively ignoring the most dangerous.The so-called gun control listed today is not reasonable or sound, even to many anti-gunners.It is reality that as far as human on human caused preventable deaths, medical malpractice is orders of magnitude worse, but we must have health care. Knives kill many more than so-called assault rifles, yet we need them to eat, just as we need guns for protection, hunting, and recreation. Vehicles driven by people kill more, but we need them for transportation a lot. Hammers kill more than so-called assault rifles, too, yet we need them to build.There is no Constitutional Right to keep and bear hammers, but there is for arms, including guns. Except automatics and cannons, and explosive missiles.There is no Constitutional Right to smoke cigarettes which kill hundreds of thousands per year including second hand smoke. There is the Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which really does not include killing others if it makes you happy, but does include the right of self defense to live which others can not take away from you just because they don't like guns of some sort.There are already thousands of laws about guns on the books, so even more aren't reasonably going to make a difference. The root causes of the increased violence are not addressed and we keep letting in over a million per year to increase our overpopulation. Crowd tolerance takes time, but is an extremely negative trait ecologically. In the end the crowded starving masses will turn to cannibalism to live, using sharp sticks if they have to. Insanity will become even more common merely because there are more people and not enough money to cover treating them all.These economic effects are among the first wave with overpopulation. A country 16.4 trillion in debt can not afford to treat all of the mentally unstable, or those affected by overcrowding hostility and insanity. Back when I was a kid and the US had half as many people, you did not hear of so many mass murders, but there were a few nuts who did and others who were cannibal. Even then the USA was well over long term sustainable population at the standard of living desired by most.So-called assault weapons banning will not change the root causes that are increasing with even more gross overpopulation. All weapons are assault weapons, or >>protection<< weapons, including our fists. Knee jerk reaction to surface problems will not get at the real roots. We are already too outgunned by the police and military, and the only thing keeping us from even a more tyrannical government is so many of us armed. Police can not act as fast as a citizen armed who is under attack from criminals, and the government is not enforcing the laws it has made let alone more laws. Many in government are guilty of felonies but not taken out of office and charged like they should be. Our country has been invaded by 30 million in the past 30 years and the military have not stopped it, nor treasonous politicians. Pollution and depletion have gone up, crimes against humanity no less terrible than a nut kid killing numerous innocent little kids.Does banning weapons matter when overpopulation will cause mass deaths in the billions followed many years later by extinction caused by the pollution those numbers of people put in the biosphere over time?Knee jerk reactions and idiotic logic don't help the children of the future. So-called reasonable gun control does nothing.

"Hammers kill more than so-called assault rifles, too, yet we need them to build."

When was the last time any of us heard about a mass killing due to hammers?>> ]google "hammer murders"[[/]

Here's an article that intentionally takes one specific weapon, rifles, and dishonestly compares it to dozens of weapons; the FBI stats for blunt objects do not differentiate between hammers, clubs, tire irons, nunchuks, bricks, crowbars, baseball bats, beer bottles, billy clubs, poles, cinderblocks, irons, and dozens of other weapons that are used to bludgeon people. It also conveniently leaves out every other type of gun murder.

'fess up Johnny .... ride in on your one trick which is population control. Isn't it?[b]>>>{{no, you conveniently forgot all the emboldened remarks above]< If the US had stricter gun control, fewer people would die>>}}didn't happen before{{<<< .... and this wouldn't be very good for the "environment" and "ecosphere' and all those darn immigrants who are totally destroying the planet.>>}}the main source of US overpopulation and US people except me produce 20 times the pollution, and depletion of third worlders{{<< Got your number bud and feeling as bad for your pony as I feel for the imaginary lines.

[b]

Population graphs and pollution/depletion graphs are not imaginary lines. Other lines, like with human behavior have to be drawn.

"Think globally; Act locally" is such a cliche by now, and yet, as with most cliches, it holds much truth.Because if and 'possibly' when the ship goes down, we're all going down with it. So, speaking rationally, global warming and systems depletion of all kinds knows no borders. Of course, exploitation of third world countries and first, second, and third world environments provides a certain lifestyle with certain amenities, for some ...... the depletion of the environment and the exploitation of human beings is an actuality in ALL countries and is linked. While it is linked, it involves us all. Yet, you seem to be particularly concerned with certain borders. Our crisis is a global.

Food for thought ..... the way we treat each other and the way we treat the "environment" (of which we are) is the same. So your insistence on the environment, the ecosphere, the aquifiers, the ..... you know the depth and breadth ..... WITHOUT a direct inquiry about how we treat each other ..... is not constructive. You are looking for people and groups of people to blame. Immigrants in the US are a convenient and easy target because we've all seen the statistics on over-population .... and they are shocking. The population graphs show a trajectory of many more bodies on this planet for quite a few decades ... and then a dropping off. Why would the population reach a turning point and begin to decrease? Because we are simultaneoulsly evolving not just in technology (much of which is haphazard anyway), but also in people communicating with each other and forging communities and sharing ideas. In doing so, we see people doing what they do best. It's the only way if we are to see ourselves through the next few decades where the population will continue along that trajectory of increase. There are close to 7 billion on the planet and there are many more coming. We need to brace ourselves for this coming wave of bodies.

We're not doing well so far and it is coming to a tipping point. This is a critical time and we need to make some choices if we are to survive.

To hold yourself to your particular home, backyard, and family .... because you have fought for it and suffered for it .... is akin to all of us because we all need what you need. What you need and have is what everyone needs ... a roof over your head, and food to eat, and clothes to wear, and the basic securities of life. Do you realize how simple and yet how profound that is? We all need what you need.

Our planet, and therefore WE .... are suffering because we treat the environment the same way we treat each other. And we have turned an abundant planet into one of scarcity. Our systems, the ones we have created, are ensuring our demise. But we were talking about gun control, right? LaPierre is hoping for civil war ..... the American version of Al Queda .... in order to advance their own profits and fear agenda in order to make those profits. They cite gov tyranny .... but fear is the real tyranny and the NRA are exploiting that agenda quite rigorously!

We know this is going to happen again. We know there is this level of aberration in our society. Some have proposed armed presence at our schools and very loudly labeled gun nuts. Arms in schools has worked in other countries. It has worked in Israel, Peru, Philippines, and Thailand. With the bad economy we are seeing law enforcement across this country decimated. From Oakland to Chicago police departments have announced will not respond to burglaries unless the bugler is still there. We are not going to find the funding to pay for an armed presents in our schools anytime soon. What we can do which makes better tactical sense is to enact a volunteer program for any teacher, administrator, janitor, maintenance employee who wishes to carry and go through the training the ability to do so. By training I mean one to three weeks of firearm, tactics, and deadly force training.

One advantage to doing it this way is that a uniformed security or police officer is readily identifiable. At Colombine the shooters knew of an armed presence at the school and staged a diversion at the other end of the campus. Trained unidentified employees make for a much more difficult problem for a planning shooter to surmount, and when it does happen you have the ability to stop an attack much quicker because the first responders are on campus.

Now the training how to respond to an armed attack is a joke. If you look at the Department of Homeland Security’s training film of how to survive workplace violence basically its hunker down under your desk and wait it out. And, that is exactly what our students are instructed to do when gun shots ring out. This is exactly how half of those murders occurred during the Colombine shootings. Kids hiding under tables and desks in the library. This training serves up kids on a platter to murderers.

Lets go back to the late 1950's and look at the fire at Chicago’s Our Lady of Angels Catholic School that took 95 lives. In the time it took the Fire responders to get there many were blocked off and perished. At that time there were no fire extinguisher or fire hoses in the school. That changed. School employees now know exactly where the hoses and extinguishers are and are trained in there use. Schools were retrofitted with fire alarms and sprinklers. Why? To save lives. Every school now has fire drills and every new school is literally built from the ground up to get the kids out as fast as possible. My daughters elementry school has an outside door to every classroom and library. That school can be evacuated in thirty seconds. Logical thinking adults gave the teachers on campus the tools and the training to save lives against a deadly threat.

What happened at Our Lady of Angels is that the nuns told the kids to get under their desks and pray. Today teachers know how to stop bleeding, administer CPR, they know where the fire extinguisher are and the fire hoses and are drilled to get the kids out in case of fire. The armed teacher presents in the next logical step to save the lives of kids considering maniacs target this "gun free" zone on purpose.

Given what is going on in Colorado I can only conclude Democrats are not interested in saving lives. They are only interested in this issue as an opportunity to restrict freedoms. Four major gun bills passed the House and Jessica’s law was killed in committee the week before. One of these laws turned colleges into game preserves where the criminally insane can now hunt our kids without a bag limit. Female students are told by Democrats no your better off with a call box, whistle, or a gun free zone. Women are told no your better off vomiting or pissing yourself to defend against rape.

Average number of deaths where police stop a mass shooting. 14.Average number of deaths where a citizen concealed carrier stops the mass shooting. 2.

If your a logical reasoning adult it is clear what must happen and what should not happen. This whole argument against protecting our kids and women for the sake of a political issue is quite disgusting really.

We know this is going to happen again. We know there is this level of aberration in our society. Some have proposed armed presence at our schools and very loudly labeled gun nuts. Arms in schools has worked in other countries. It has worked in Israel, Peru, Philippines, and Thailand.

We are not going to find the funding to pay for an armed presents in our schools anytime soon. What we can do which makes better tactical sense is to enact a volunteer program for any teacher, administrator, janitor, maintenance employee who wishes to carry and go through the training the ability to do so. By training I mean one to three weeks of firearm, tactics, and deadly force training.

One advantage to doing it this way is that a uniformed security or police officer is readily identifiable. At Colombine the shooters knew of an armed presence at the school and staged a diversion at the other end of the campus. Trained unidentified employees make for a much more difficult problem for a planning shooter to surmount, and when it does happen you have the ability to stop an attack much quicker because the first responders are on campus.

An unidentified armed guard will not be easy to tell by the bulge of a weapon if they are actually carried on the person or have a delay in acquiring it if the weapon is not on the person.

Of course, none of thei public planning would cause anyone to assume there is a armed guard and act just as was the case in columbine? A couple of weeks of training? Police officers receive several months of training and then are supervised in the field for many more months and that training may not be adequate at times.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

"An unidentified armed guard will not be easy to tell by the bulge of a weapon if they are actually carried on the person"Not all concealed carry produce an easy to see "bulge". Most are designed specifically not to show. Is that statement "common ignorance"?The so called amount of training gap depends on the person. Well trained people can lose their cool or make the wrong decision, while supposedly untrained have been very effective in stopping an attack. We do know that present criminals and many insane or exhibiting violent mental aberrations will not obey laws, so the law abiding will be at a disadvantage, as they have been. The proposed gun bans and regulations will not change that.I don't believe the jump to ban from some 2/3 preventable incidents has anything to do with saving school kids' lives. I believe it is for more government control over the law abiding. Colorado has proposed a ban on 9 shot magazines in common home defense shotguns, to 8 shot. Why? As if 8 shots is not deadly? What am I supposed to do, put a 2 3/4" plug in? Or am I a criminal now for having the Mossberg 9 shot? Is it because the police shotguns are 9 shot and then they will have that one shot advantage over a formerly law abiding citizen? You know the crooks won't bother putting in a plug. Hunters, if they are legal, must have a plug to no more than 3 shots for hunting season. How about all the money spent by the people who have bought those AR15 and other banned types? Is the government going to give them their money back?If the reason for it were for the general protection, then the police and military should be similarly hamstrung, because many have turned bad, and been in the papers lately more than school shootings. Then again, we would have those criminals and other domestic enemies who just won't obey the rules, just like the enemies in war zones don't obey the Geneva Convention (from communists to moslems) while we "try" to, but even the "good guys" still cause collateral damage. So what do we do about the common ignorance, government tyranny, and all the scofflaws(including those elected officials who commit felonies)?

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

"An unidentified armed guard will not be easy to tell by the bulge of a weapon if they are actually carried on the person"Not all concealed carry produce an easy to see "bulge". Most are designed specifically not to show. Is that statement "common ignorance"?

The smaller frame and caliber carry weapons are more easily concealed, but also have drawbacks of short barrel length and weaker cartridges, but still are not perfect, especially if carried everyday as would have to be the case. Many of the carry systems for women involve a purse, which is not going to be with a teacher at all times. Since the vast majority of teachers are female, unless the they dress differently than before, there will be some issues with concealment.

Quote:

The so called amount of training gap depends on the person. Well trained people can lose their cool or make the wrong decision, while supposedly untrained have been very effective in stopping an attack.

It is not stopping an attack, but knowing when there is a real threat and how to deal with it. Also there is the safe use of a firearm in an area where many innocnet victims may be hit. The police have much more training and they still have issues with such things.

Quote:

How about all the money spent by the people who have bought those AR15 and other banned types? Is the government going to give them their money back?

No, it would probably wirk like the previous ban where the inventory prior to the ban would be allowed to remain and would eventually be removed from the use pool by attrition. I do not think that is a very good method, but it is a cheaper method.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

The Heizer Double Tap. Internal hammer 5/8" thick x 3 1/4" x 3 5/8" 45ACP derringer with 2 quick load in the grip. Or an extended range 1 million volt dart taser disguised as a pointer, book, eraser, or several of each. I have a 31 cal. black powder Judge Roy Bean book single shot derringer. Let me read you a line out of this book!Or you could be "reasonable" like Canada;http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/02/in-conse ... ing-green/

_________________"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein

Normal accuracy in a pressure situation at any distance of maybe 1% since the old rule of thumb for a derringer accuracy was “minute of gambler across a card table (4 – 6 feet)” which is considered knife range as well.

Quote:

Or an extended range 1 million volt dart taser disguised as a pointer, book, eraser, or several of each.

Again not carried on the person and with the need to prevent examination or use which would expose the weapon for what it is. The normal range for non-police issue is 15' with reduced accuracy without sights if designed to look like a book, etc., and even reduced range in the pointer disguise.